Was wondering how is the best /safest way to discuss a donation or place  ad .Thanks

just refer them to the site.

If they persist, hangup and do not answer that number again as LE loves to catch gals talking about money on the phone or on email to make a case against them.

(still not a lawyer)

... most of the girls I know who got caught have discussed the rate and and services over the phone which was recorded and used against you.

That would depend on what state you in at the time the transaction occurred. Wire taps or taping telephone conversations are illegal in California as well as many other states.  The only exception for taping a telephone conversation by LE in California is in extreme drug cases where there is virtually no other way LE can build a case against a large drug operation without using taping, or "bugging" a phone.  LE could not obtain a warrant to tape a telephone conversation for a suspected misdemeanor vice operation.

If you said during a phone conversation that so many roses would make you happy then the officer would have no evidence to support his testimony that you mentioned a fee for sex.  However, the state could possibly use your website to support the officer's testimony if fees were mentioned.  The state could also use any email or other documents where a fee was mentioned.

It is against the law for private persons to tape telephone conversations in California and many other states unless the person doing the taping tells the person being taped.  Businesses often tape telephone conversations but they must warn the other person they are being taped and also have an intermittent beep to let you know you are being taped. LE can tape calls made to a police facility e.g. 911 without obtaining a warrant because there is no expectation of privacy.

State law does not apply to Federal LE agents.

If out of left field the cop tries to throw money at Lady  for "no apparent reason"..
and the lady says " no thank you "then the cop says "you don't want any money?" and lady says "No" ...... This "refusal" is listed in report with the explanation that the lady was just trying to avoid getting into trouble & would have taken it later.....

LE does NOT have to 'tape' you on the phone.  They simply have to testify that the solicitation or pricing happened during the conversation and there is NO law against having one or more other officers listening to the conversation to support the testimony.  

As for discussing 'roses' instead of dollars... thats a very lame attempt to camoflage pricing that would not hold up in court.  

I've been with at least one lady who did not look for or touch the envelope till after we were done and I had left.  I asked her about it later and her position was that she was far more ready to accept the risk of being ripped off (which had never happened) than do anything that might get her busted if the new client was LE.

MVR

The fact is the officer has nothing to support his testimony regarding what he heard during a phone conversation. That certainly doesn't mean he can't testify as to what he heard the provider say, and that doesn't mean the jury won't believe him.  What it means is that there is no material evidence like a website or document to support his testimony. Having a fee on a website or quoting a fee in an email would just be more evidence for the state to use against the defendant.

I used the word roses instead of money because roses is a word often used to describe money.  I didn't infer in anyway that using the word roses would somehow keep a provider from being arrested or convicted.

Waiting for the client to leave before a provider touches the envelope won't keep her from being arrested because she would be arrested before any session occurred. Actually, the envelope could be used as evidence against the provider if she requested the money be placed in an envelope on her website or she  stated so in an email. It could also be used against her if she told the officer to use an envelope during a phone conversation.  

The only difference between what was communicated during a phone conversation as opposed to what was communicated via a written document is the defense attorney would be have a much better chance of picking apart the officers testimony if the officer had nothing more than his word to support his testimony.

The bottom line:  A written document is just more evidence the state has to use against the defendant.

I have a Fav lady who does not accept the donation up from...  just old school I think.  I leave it on her dresser silently while redressing.  In the back & forth to the bathroom & such, it disappears.  I like it for reasons of illusion, if nothing else.
skb

as Von & SKB have described,

So how does it play out? I am still trying to understand the LE's argument of "she would have taken it later"  .

When I hear "later"  IF someone says  blah blah "later"  that many times means "NEVER"
or "not a concern"....
So how can LE claim "later"  as a clear agreement  in a 647b  & no clarification of what the $$$ is an exchange

..that LE went through with the act, THEN paid her.  In theory, LE cannot engage in a sex act and also arrest the provider.  This is one of those 'I'm not a lawyer' moments, but I believe the crime is the proposition of sex for money, not the actual act of having sex.  If the provider invites the client to her place, never asks for money and makes no notice of an envelope, has sex with him, and only later does the client, again, unasked for, leave a 'gift' does that violate a law?  And even if it does, hasn't LE compromised itself and its case by having had sex with the provider?

I had one provider come to my room and first thing she did was give me a dfk followed by unzipping me for a quick sample of her bj.  THEN we took care of the donation and got down to serious business.  Again, in theory, LE would not have done the DFK or let her suck him.  Probably there are vice cops out there that would do that, but its against policy, ethics etc.  

Now just imagine, its Incall, the client is LE, he has a romp with the provider, THEN busts her.  Three months later when it finally goes to trial, the provider's attorney asks for a TV and VCR to be brought into court to show the tape from the hidden camera of the cop fucking/getting a bj/doing DATY with the provider!  Wouldn't that make for a great time!!!  Case is dismissed, the cop is fired and likely gets a divorce and the headlines... omg...

MVR

You are correct.  The crime occurs when sex is offered for money or other consideration; or money or other consideration is offered for sex. Nothing physical is required for a violation of the law.

You are also correct in your scenario about what could and probably would happen if a vice cop had sex with a provider and then arrested her. I imagine if his department and the DA wanted to stretch it, the DA might be able to file prostitution charges against the officer since he paid for sex, and had sex, while he was operating outside the scope and authority of his position as a police officer.

However, I am sure it has happened somewhere along the line, being that anything is possible. LOL

Balboa7 mentions "expectation of privacy", but almost as an afterthought.  "Expectation" is the key to the California statute.

If tape recording occurs in a meeting of more than two people, there cannot be an expectation of privacy; hence, the taping probably will not be found to constitute an invasion.

If one party has a telephone conversation while using a speakerphone, the other party to the conversation can usually tell that is the case.  LE could tape the conversation while conversation is taking place in the background.  If they were creative they might even have someone yell at the guy on the phone.  If the provider asks the caller what is going on, he could reply that he is in a bar.  Not likely an expectation of privacy would be found in such a situation.

Bottom line:  A lady normally will not have the financial resources to raise the issue in a "supression of evidence" hearing nor to go to trial.

Best advice:  do not talk about sex acts AND money during telephone coversations.  If cops are on the other end of the conversation, you will not be trowing them "catnip" and encouraging them to pursue you further.

Analogy: cops are similar to crooks, in that they will pursue the easier victims.  Leave your "keys in the ignition" and you have a greater risk of becoming a victim.

California state law prohibits wire taps or taping of phone calls by law enforcement unless the person they are taping is aware that the telephone call is being taped. The law was amended a few years ago to allow taping in drug cases where it would be almost impossible to obtain evidence any other way. The law is very specific and requires the affidavit used to obtain a search warrant to wire tap or tape a telephone conversation to include several elements.  Judges who sign those search warrants have to follow very strict guidelines when approving search warrants for wire taps or the taping of telephone calls.  The officer who writes the search warrant has to swear under oath that the information in the affidavit is true and is only to be used for an investigation involving drugs wherein all other means of investigation have been exhausted and the information obtained in the wire tap or taping of the telephone conversation will only be used for the drug case specified in the affidavit.

The law pertaining to private citizens taping telephone calls is not the same as the law pertaining to enforcement taping telephone calls.  

If you are aware of a recent change in the law which allows law enforcement to tape telephone calls other than drug investigations, please post the statute that changed the law. I am referring to California law.

I am not sure what all those initials stood for but it sounded fun.

anyway, so basically you just proved that if a cop arrested someone that refused money & there is no consent , no violation then it is an unlawful arrest. which equals factual innocense, bingo

and another poster had a good analogy about vice cops are like criminals.
..those bastards

.....what's the best way to address it when contacting a provider who does not make mention of it on her web site? One would hate to commit to a meeting only to find that any donations expected would be outside the budget or expectations, but at the same time one doesn't want to get burned by LE, either.

... She was arrested right after she stepped in the room...

IF there's a review here, that is. If there isn't any mention in the ads, and there aren't any reviews to refer to, how should one inquire? Or perhaps it's best to wait it out for some reviews to appear or some other reliable source of information shows up.

they still convicted the ladies even though LE had sex with them.
In Rockville, Md, known as Montgomery county. The cases were thrown out do to the sex acts by LE but the place was still closed down.
I haerd about these things from locals but I haven't been able to find much information about it.

how they roll.
You have to get a lawyer and go to court and it will get dropped.
they count on a guilty plea.
That is just the cost of business in Vegas.
You could also expect that in Dallas, Texas.
i forget the other places.
Always do your homework for each jurisdiction.

It may be against ethics...but it happens.